4.7 Article

Irreversibility features of a shell-and-tube heat exchanger fitted with novel trapezoidal oblique baffles: Application of a nanofluid with different particle shapes

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2021.105352

关键词

Nanofluid; Shell and tube heat exchanger; Trapezoidal inclined baffle; Nanoparticle shape; Boehmite nanoparticles; Entropy generation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study reveals that nanoparticle shape has an impact on the entropy generation rate in a heat exchanger, with platelet-shaped nanoparticles showing the highest entropy production in the hot fluid and Os-shaped particles exhibiting the highest thermal and frictional entropy production in the cold fluid.
The influences of nanoparticle shape on the Entropy Generation Rate (EGR) of a boehmite nanofluid in a shell and tube heat exchanger fitted with trapezoidal oblique baffles are investigated. The hot fluid is the nanofluid with five particle shapes (i.e., platelet, cylinder, blade, brick, and oblate spheroid), whereas the cold fluid is selected to be water. The hot fluid streams at the tube-side, while the cold fluid streams at the shell-side. By the elevation of the Reynolds number (Re), in the warm fluid, the thermal and frictional entropy productions increase, while the Bejan number reduces. The nanofluid with platelet-shaped nanoparticles results in the greatest frictional EGR and thermal EGR in the hot fluid, pursued by the suspensions with the cylinder-, blade-, brick-, and Os-shaped nanoparticles, respectively. By rising the Reynolds number, in the cold fluid, the thermal EGR reduces, and the frictional EGR increases. The nanofluid with Os-shaped particles shows the highest thermal and frictional entropy productions in the cold fluid. All in all, with considering the whole heat exchanger regarding the second law of thermodynamics, the platelet-shaped particles are the best ones to be utilized in the heat exchanger, resulting in the lowest irreversibility.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据